Creativity Can’t Manifest Itself Without Provocation
Dueling dialogue that's unsafe at any speed
Deb Remington: As a spokesperson for a school system, anything I say relating to my “personal” perceptions, comments or frustrations concerning my community is viewed as a statement represented by the district. I've been passionately involved in community activism for over 25 years, yet my voice is no longer my own, even when I make it very clear I am representing myself – no one else. I do understand that I hold a great deal of responsibility in my "day job", however, I now realize why many people in my position choose not to get involved in the local "politics."
Tisha Nemeth: Speaking and working within range of the public is a balancing act. In the public arena, people become uncomfortable when an idea is expressed that challenges the conventional ways of 'group thinking.' Creative and unpredictable communication from an individual is often criticized because honesty is not a quality that's valued in our city, and those who speak and live by it in the work place are thereby set apart - it's considered dangerous if you're truthful. Special interest groups are bent on their own self-serving perspective, and those of us who must work with them or within the public eye are at the mercy of the spectators/audience. Anymore, I can anticipate when I’m about to get censored, criticized, lectured, etc. There’s always someone taking exception to what I’m saying, what I'm writing, how I’m saying it or how I look, and other nonsense. Case in point: my infamous quote “If you write for an audience you’re a whore,” spoken in a private meeting to one of our writers, and then shared/relayed out in the public to an appalled technical writer - it was hilarious to hear his righteous response against it. And my favorite quote above obviously does not apply to tech writers, but I digress...as authentic communicators and writers, we don't have the privilege of being ourselves without paying a penalty; there is a price to be paid for being honest, and upon delivery of the honesty, we are relegated to representing a specific group when we are only representing ourself. Representing yourself through your own words is problematic; the words can be your own, but these honest contributions are typically misread, misunderstood and misinterpreted - it's inevitable. People may or may not respect your individual voice and style of communication; it's hit and miss, and there’s no way to pre-determine how the public will respond...
DR: I think it is a way to try to control the voice; individual thoughts and voice are, in the end, connected to that organization, who can then insist that you be quiet, not upsetting the generic equilibrium. And yet...if it is constructive criticism made by individuals who have a vested interest and are dedicated to the cause, it is definitely a “good thing” regardless of how it is communicated.
TN: You have to choose to speak truthfully, regardless of groups or organizations that attempt to control your voice. Writing and speaking is the ultimate personal expression, it’s tantamount to breathing, and to suppress this outlet is a censorship assault. Our culture influences us to sugar-coat and censor for propriety, because speaking honestly is considered a liability; I've experienced it in my professional writing and my poetry via censorship/alteration. But creativity can’t manifest itself without provocation; it translates into not stifling your intellectual passions and voice. The only legacy I can hope to pass on: speak and write for yourself, it’s a hell of a lot more satisfying, and it'll deflate the predictable reading experience that audiences have to put up with...the challenge is keeping speech open and real.
DR: Speaking of open speech, summer is here, and the protesters marching in front of the adult book stores are back in full force. Protesting against porn is their right, but the thing I don't understand is why they bring along their children – how do they explain what pornography is to a small child? Do parents really need to be exposing small children to the building with its racy signage and sex toys in the window...I mean, do children really need to know about XXX videos and all that goes with it? What is the point they're attempting to make by parading their kids in front of these stores? I would rather see the parents spending quality time at home with these children, teaching them positive moral values in a safe, secure and loving home. When the children are old enough to understand the adult industry and what to protest – then let them go for it! Until then, allow them to be children. Could it be parents are exercising their freedom to protest and speak against porn by marching their children around the building and hoping it induces feelings of guilt to the porn supporters...or to demonstrate that their children will grow up and be the next porn victims? It’s a way of speaking against the adult entertainment industry, but involving children is definitely questionable.
TN: There's alot going on in Cleveland right now that is questionable...
Got responses? Email us at Letters@CoolCleveland.com
(:divend:)